Member Info for fatsuperman

I do think the HBR deal needs to be very carefully considered. Originally I dismissed it out of hand, but shareholders need more information on the project, current assets, delivery plan, timescale and all remaining costs to production. Without that we cannot very well make an informed decision on whether we feel the dilution is worth accepting.

We are the managing agent, this is being refreshed. Similar terms will mean things like the management fee for us to run the mine will be 'similar' to how it is today. Currently, this fee accrues to the loan account.

I can report that I drank as much coffee as I could and ate as many sandwiches as possible. I'm trying to recoup my investment via the buffet. I reckon a few hundred thousand years of this approach and I'll have broken even. Exciting stuff.

UKRed, I wasn't that guy that left early, I was sitting behind him and I think you know that I'm not taking any of it lightly. This isn't some half-time pep talk here, where we all rally around and say how great the next 45 minutes are going to be. We are talking about whether you honestly believe that the team we met can deliver what they say they can.

I consider investor events 'marketing opportunities' for these companies, and everything they say needs to be taken with a generous dose of salt. Is RAN mine going to be up and running 9 months after the deal goes through? You actually believe that? You actually believe we'll hit anywhere near those C1 costs?

I'm trying to be pragmatic about it and my post last night and to the investor group I'm in was more about me initially being very against the deal, because it didn't make sense to me. KME is easy to understand - I want more detail, but you can quite easily accept that this reduces a lot of ongoing costs for us. HBR is very poorly explained, and aside from the, what, 12 of us there last night, nobody else is any the wiser. It doesn't matter what you or I now think - PREM have to convince the other thousand or so shareholders

Everything we are invested in here is currently just 'potential'. PREM need to provide a sound strategy and plan to deliver on some of that.

My 2p on the HBR deal, yes I think I'm 'pro' this now. After what we learned. But it's at a very high cost right now. I do not like that one bit.

I agree with the sentiment about HBR. I do not think this acquisition makes any sense whatsoever AT THIS TIME. I'm sure it's an amazing opportunity for someone, maybe even PREM. But the timing is appalling. I sincerely hope that Geroge offers the KME and HBR deals as two separate items to vote on, and I hope that shareholders say no to Honey Badger.
As Chippy says, it's madness to buy something and then have a commitment to continue to invest in it, when we have no money and a load of in-flight projects already.

The maiden resource estimate at KOD is smaller than Zulu, and spread across three locations. The grades are better than the current Zulu grades, but the recovery results are not. Whilst it seems a decent resource, it's certainly not on the same scale as the Zulu 'target'.

This is good news. We already know funds are going to be needed, and these are raised at a 20% premium for the Zulu DFS drill campaign. Out of all of them, Zulu is the project that has the best chance of making PREM worth some serious money in the coming years. We need to be progressing and this is finally, the first vital step in getting back on track.

Prem are still in due diligence with the HBR deal, so I would expect more to be revealed in the coming weeks.

If they are going back to production then this very likely means the government funding previously announced is going ahead. He obviously cannot RNS something like that until the finer details have been worked out, hence the brief note telling us that we have the positive result we wanted.

This update is EXACTLY how it should have been handled and I am very pleased and very surprised. I actually expected silence for a week so this is hopefully a sign of improving comms.

Chippy, the company have said that those people making the complaints are not previous employees and never have been, they are simply occupiers of mine's property. The company have all of the legal approval for this and are now in the formal eviction process. They have the support of the government, police and local authorities.

The people who are making the complaints are currently living in the houses for free. They have a comment from an opposition councillor supporting their claims.

One of these groups is lying, obviously we don't know which one, but I'm sure we'll find out in due course.

Bill, the mine shut down 17 years ago, those people have not been working there during this time, they are saying they weren’t paid the correct termination compensation. However this is untrue on several fronts. Firstly, those people aren’t even previous employees of the mine, second the employees were paid termination correctly.

All from HBR themselves so obviously I don’t know who is correct, but HBR have all the proper support from the authorities.

The alternative view is from a newspaper, some ‘squatters’ and an opposition counsellor

Basically Chippy, yes that is a fabrication. It just so happens that the comments from the loca councillor is from the opposition party. You can make your own mind up on their motivations.
Allegedly, the people in those houses (which are owned by RAN mine) are not even the former employees - they are just illegal occupiers. All this is from HBR management. And as mentioned here, HBR have the support of the government, police and local authorities. They are currently in the 30-day notice period for the formal eviction process.

Although Lloyd, the RNS states they will be issued at the HIGHER of the minimum issue price (0.85p) or 5-day average. So frankly I don’t understand this. Why would the other party accept shares at about an 8-fold premium over today’s price

Ironically Cherry it is Danakili that have the mine life measured in hundreds of years - must be some constraints to how quickly they can mine it. Circum has a ~25 year life against the current resource

Indeed IQ... and their C1 operating costs were significantly higher than Circum's also. Obviously both numbers will be 'marketing' numbers at the moment, but I suppose it's still an indicator to compare.
At it's most basic level, if Circum's 100%-owned Danakil project is 3-3.5 times the size of Danakili's 50%-owned Colluli project, then you could just compare market caps as so:

£100m - Danakili Ltd market cap
Multiply by 2 to reflect 100% ownership
Multiply by 3 to reflect resource/production output

£600m - notional Circum Minerals value
5% of which is £30m

I mean, it's obviously a nonsense measure but then so was the original post :)

Danakili's market cap is about £100m, they own 50% of their potash project. Circum's mineral resource is over three times the size of Danakili's, with a planned output over three and a half times that of Danakili - once both projects are ramped up to their full production. Obviously there is a lot more involved in it than that, but then I don't suppose you are interested in reality, facts or debate, but rather in creating noise.

Yes I also noticed that had changed this morning Spaceman. A slim hope that updating their logo and font is a precursor to some more interesting news. All we can do is wait and see :)

They need to go through a slow evolution here. You simply cannot drastically change your offer as you’ll alienate their remaining customers and likely not lure in enough younger customers. It needs to be gradual. They have always been about forward-thinking clothing technology and quality and many of their innovations have been brilliant over the years. Less in house brand diversification has helped but needs to go further IMO.
The big issue with M&S is still their ridiculous fulfilment costs, terrible operating models, one of the poorest in the industry food availability and waste, etc.
The ‘new’ team need to carry on this transformation of the business but it’s going to take much longer than they have predicted. You cannot revamp your people and processes quickly, not without huge risk, and M&S are very risk averse.
I wish them the best as I have a massive soft spot for them, but this transformation / recovery doesn’t seem all that much more successful than the previous twenty ‘recoveries’ they’ve had during my lifetime.

Not the same, the indigenisation act was about putting the majority stake of foreign owned companies into the hands of local Zimbabweans. They aren’t state enterprises, they are funds of local people. Obviously, if you were a cynic, you might anticipate that those locals may be ministers and their mates!

That list is a list of state-owned entities that they want to sell / farm-out. It is entirely unrelated to the situation with RHA / PREM.